Hello:

MSNBC falls behind CNN (http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/01/fox-dominates-msnbc-struggles-behind-cnn-in-third-quarter-ratings/). What do you think this means?

excon

It means Fox is more popular.

It's part of the mainstream liberal brainwashing propaganda in Obummer's back pocket.

Wake up sheeple!

What do you think this means?
That MSNBC is clueless ? They think Ed Schultz is their savior ? You see the issue here is that the left is so used to gvt subsidies ,or government imposed monopolies , that they forget that sometimes they have to compete in the market place . Look at their line up ;besides Chris Matthews ,the rest of them are a bunch of losers... starting with Morning Schmoe.. the RINO who claims the be conservative.
To be honest ;if it weren't for cable television (another government preferred monopoly ) bundling channels and forcing them into packages they sell to their customers (even though there is less than zero interest in purchasing these channels by their customers )... most cable channels would go belly up.

That MSNBC is clueless ? They think Ed Schultz is their savior ? You see the issue here is that the left is so used to gvt subsidies ,or government imposed monopolies , that they forget that sometimes they have to compete in the market place . Look at their line up ;besides Chris Matthews ,the rest of them are a bunch of losers ...starting with Morning Schmoe ..the RINO who claims the be conservative.
To be honest ;if it weren't for cable television (another government prefered monopoly ) bundling channels and forcing them into packages they sell to their customers (even though there is less than zero interest in purchasing these channels by their customers )... most cable channels would go belly up.

Yep, I'm starting to like Hulu and Netflix - tired of paying for 138 shopping channels to get the dozen or so networks I watch.

MSNBC's problem now is that they talk too fast and seem to be reading off teleprompters too often. I feel sermonized. They used to give thoughtful commentary and have interesting guests. Now the same news events are "discussed" to death throughout the day (no one can think of anything else to talk about and switch gears?), and it's the same old-same old guests who too often get asked questions and then are talked over as they try to respond.

I don't know who's running the network now, but I wish they would rethink this. They've lost me as a regular viewer.

Also FOX never stops changing .They could've remained dominant with their current format. But they are moving their shows and adding new ones They moved Hannity to 10PM (a much better time because I'm asleep then anyway. ) They are moving Greta to a more reasonable time. They are giving lib Megyn Kelly her own show. And... their best move is to give Shep Smith a new format besides talking head during the news hour. He will now run the 'Fox News Deck' . He is much too talented to be a standup news hour host.

Hello again,

I'm amazed that NOBODY said FOX is on top because their politics are CORRECT politics..

The problem at MSNBC is management. They need hosts like ME. I would be the left wing equivalent of Glenn Beck. I agree with wondergirl... There's nothing fresh about it.

And, WHY in the hell, do they run PRISON shows all weekend long?? That just doesn't seem to be something a liberal network would do...

I DO love Rachael Maddow, though.

excon

I DO love Rachael Maddow, though.
She seems to be the only spontaneous (unrehearsed, no teleprompter) person on that network. Although she talks faster nowadays (or I'm getting old... ). And I love it when she makes alcoholic beverages up close and in person at the end of shows, with her blender and uncooperative lemons or limes and measuring cup.

Hello again,

I'm amazed that NOBODY said FOX is on top because their politics are CORRECT politics..


excon

Maybe because in the world of lib dominant media they are unique.

Megyn Kelly destroyed Rachel Madcow in the 9 PM et time slot . So of course the head of MSDNC ,Phil Griffin thinks there is a conspiracy and wants an investigation . What really happened is that Madcow beat Kelly in one demo by a very slim margin on Kelly's launch night .But on Tuesday ,she beat Madcow in all demos.
Don't worry Phil .You'll get those ratings when Alec Baldwin begins his show... bwa haaaahaaahaaa!!
Alec Baldwin Phones Radio Show Irate - DJ Alex Belfield Shocked! - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhxt9nsIYHM)

I think it means more media hype by a self interested few

MSNBC's president demands an investigation (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/msnbc-president-wants-investigation-fox-647852) into how Kelly could possibly have trounced Maddow...


Megyn Kelly blew out Rachel Maddow in the key demo on Tuesday after losing to her the night before. "I have never seen it in all my years of cable," says Phil Griffin.

Phil Griffin, president of MSNBC, says there's something fishy about Tuesday's ratings for the Fox News Channel, which were up significantly from a day earlier when Fox News debuted its new schedule. And he wants an investigation.

"Monday we had a really good day in the key demographic. On the night that Fox News debuted their three shows, we either tied or beat them in those hours," Griffin said at a briefing, according to TVNewser.

"Tuesday -- you guys should be doing some investigations; I have never seen it in all my years of cable -- same overnight, same everything. And they doubled their ratings in a day? It is impossible." Griffin continued, "I have never seen it. They did election-night numbers in the demo Tuesday."

The Nielsen numbers Griffin refers to include MSNBC beating Fox News on Monday in the adults 25-54 demographic at 7 p.m. and tying Fox News at 10 p.m.

At 9 p.m. on Monday, MSNBC's The Rachel Maddow Show beat Fox News' new The Kelly File, hosted by Megyn Kelly, by a slim 10,000 viewers in the key demo.


By Tuesday, though, Fox News was back to its dominant self, with 573,000 in the key demo compared with 261,000 for MSNBC between the hours of 8 p.m. and 11 p.m.

Perhaps most dramatically, Kelly's narrow loss to Rachel Maddow from a night earlier was significantly reversed, with Kelly drawing an audience of 623,000 in the key demo compared with Maddow's 291,000.

Nielsen has not yet responded to Griffin's remarks.

How could someone as perky, tenacious and hot as Megyn Kelly, on the number one cable news network possibly beat Maddow?

Hello again, Steve:

How could someone as perky, tenacious and hot as Megyn Kelly, on the number one cable news network possibly beat Maddow?Uhhhh, because she's perky and hot, and right wingers think with their d**k's.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:
Uhhhh, because she's perky and hot, and right wingers think with their d**k's.

excon

Clinton, JFK, Anthony Weiner...

I did throw "tenacious" in there.

Hello again, Steve:

Clinton, JFK, Anthony Weiner... Correction.. EVERYBODY thinks with their d**ks. But, liberals have a BRAIN too.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:
Correction.. EVERYBODY thinks with their d**ks. But, liberals have a BRAIN too.

excon

Apparently Weiner doesn't.

Hello again, Steve:

Apparently Weiner doesn't.Ok.

Excon

Maddow will make a comeback after the world series is over and the weather gets colder. Progressives are outdoors people. What you rather watch a cute talking head than MLB, MNF, or TNF?

Hello again,

I have NO stake in the network. Because it's mismanaged doesn't mean the message is too.

How many of FOX's on air personality's have a doctorate in political science? How many are Rhodes Scholars? Little Miss Perky?? I think not.

excon

Maddow will make a comeback after the world series is over and the weather gets colder. Progressives are outdoors people.

There's a novel excuse for bad ratings.

Wait till hockey season. Aw naw! You missed that too?? :(

Hello again,

I have NO stake in the network. Because it's mismanaged doesn't mean the message is too.

How many of FOX's on air personality's have a doctorate in political science?? How many are Rhodes Scholars?? Little Miss Perky??? I think not.

excon

I don't know, do you?

They are pretty and have big fake boobs - that's all that matters to the Fox viewers.

Obviously some who have opinions of Fox News have never actually watched it, but I confess - I'd rather watch watch smart, tough women who are pretty than smart, shrill women who make my eyes burn.

I just care about the news, not the vehicle that delivers it.

I'd rather watch watch smart, tough women who are pretty than smart, shrill women who make my eyes burn.
You DO watch Rachel and swoon over her throaty, mellifluous voice, especially when she mixes drinks at the end of the show?

You DO watch Rachel and swoon over her throaty, mellifluous voice, especially when she mixes drinks at the end of the show?

Uh, no. I'm one of the millions upon millions who ignore MSNBC.

Uh, no. I'm one of the millions upon millions who ignore MSNBC.
Oh, no!! You are so missing out! Rachel is very cool! Funny too.

Cool and funny are subjective. Jon Stewart is cool and funny.

Cool and funny are subjective. Jon Stewart is cool and funny.

Agreed!

'The Kelly File's' surge is legit, Nielsen says   - NY Daily News (http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/kelly-file-surge-legit-nielsen-article-1.1485556)

'The Kelly File's' surge is legit, Nielsen says   - NY Daily News (http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/kelly-file-surge-legit-nielsen-article-1.1485556)
A flash in the pan.

And the headline should be 'The Kelly File' surge is legit. Their possessive and apostrophes are incorrect.

Good move replacing an angry winger loony with a cutie pie, and getting good results for now. But will it last after she has had a few months of actually saying stuff? Or are you wagging your tongues waiting for her swimsuit issue to come around.

Rachel still FACT CHECKS better.

To Ousted Boss, Arms Watchdog Was Seen as an Obstacle in Iraq - NYTimes.com (http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/10/14/world/to-ousted-boss-arms-watchdog-was-seen-as-an-obstacle-in-iraq.html)

A flash in the pan.

And the headline should be 'The Kelly File' surge is legit. Their possessive and apostrophes are incorrect.

Tell it to the Daily Snooze

You tell 'em, I got better things to do than watch a blonde bombshell read Hannity's old lines.

You tell 'em, I got better things to do than watch a blonde bombshell read Hannity's old lines.

Spoken by someone who has never watched the show .I on the other hand have watched Madcow. Like WG says ,she does an interesting job mixing drinks .

I catch her a few nights a week but fact check all the talking heads but Megan is known for looks not brains and Rachel is good at reporting for 5 years drink night aside, so Megan has a ways to go.

We'll see.

Like WG says ,she does an interesting job mixing drinks .
She's also interesting, timely, conversational (doesn't read off a teleprompter), is darn cute, has a brain, and doesn't interrupt and overtalk her guests.

She's also interesting, timely, conversational (doesn't read off a teleprompter), is darn cute, has a brain, and doesn't interrupt and overtalk her guests.

I hate Mathews when he does that. Rachel is a good lead in to O'Donnell. There's a sharp guy.

I hate Mathews when he does that. Rachel is a good lead in to O'Donnell. There's a sharp guy.
I've really lost respect for Chris (getting too old for this maybe?). Rachel and Lawrence are the highlights of my evening, even when I don't agree with them.

but Megan is known for looks not brains

She graduated with a Juris Doctor ,and was associate editor of the Albany Law Review. She wrote at least one article for the American Bar Association journal ,and was a practicing lawyer for a decade for major law firms .
Then an ABC affiliate hired her as a DC reporter before she was hired by FOX.
The shallow crowd may not see beyond her looks. But she has a record of hard reporting ;and does not display an obvious political bias. On election night ,Karl Rove challenged the early projection that the emperor won . She asked him :
"Is this just math that you do as a Republican to make yourself feel better? Or is this real?" When you get past your bias towards the network you will see that they are closer to 'fair and balanced ' than the official network of the emperor ,MSNBC

The shallow crowd may not see beyond her looks.
Well that issue started here by one of yours:
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/fox-news-dominates-770319-2.html#post3568674

She graduated with a Juris Doctor ,and was associate editor of the Albany Law Review. She wrote at least one article for the American Bar Association journal ,and was a practicing lawyer for a decade for major law firms .
Hmmm. I have a master's too and have written four traditionally published books, was asked by the Chicago Historical Society to write an article that has been used in an untold number of bibliographies, am a Wikipedia footnote, have written articles for an autism magazine, and was a librarian for 30 years. Maybe Fox would consider hiring me.

I'd watch your show . The only reason I brought up her credentials was that shallow swipe from the progressive liberal guy who doesn't wage war on women.

Well that issue started here by one of yours:
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/fox-news-dominates-770319-2.html#post3568674

Did he also say this? but Megan is known for looks not brains

I'd watch your show .
And if I had one, I'd do a shout-out to you at the end of each one, like Carol Burnett tugging her ear to tell her grandmother "I love you." I could shout, "Yo, Tom!" and fluff my hair or something.

Granted, no he didn't, but there must be a reason why they wear short skirts and tight tops. They know their audience - aging white males.

If it comes to her, or "Mountain Men", or "Haunted Mine", she loses every time. Hell my wife loses on Sunday to football... I think?

Well that issue started here by one of yours:
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/fox-news-dominates-770319-2.html#post3568674

Again, I also described her as "tenacious" and she is every bit that, not afraid to take on the good ol' Republican boys which I would think should be a trait you'd admire. But then we aren't the ones trying to diminish her as nothing but boobs and a short skirt.

diminish her as nothing but boobs and a short skirt.No, they accept that as part of the job and on-air clothing description there.

No, they accept that as part of the job and on-air clothing description there.

Oh please, please, please tell Megyn (https://twitter.com/megynkelly) that. I want to see her eviscerate you.

She wouldn't eviscerate me, she would agree with me.

IML_UGhXz2Q

More hard hitting news reporting from Megyn: (you can start at 4 minutes)

KgH1okeC_CE

And here are some other Fox News anchors:

CDgfJ2fPb6Y

She wouldn't eviscerate me, she would agree with me.

IML_UGhXz2Q

More hard hitting news reporting from Megyn: (you can start at 4 minutes)

KgH1okeC_CE

And here are some other Fox News anchors:

CDgfJ2fPb6Y

She would agree that you see her as nothing more than a sex object? Wow, you really are deluded.

She would agree that you see her as nothing more than a sex object? Wow, you really are deluded.

I think we see what she portrays

I think we see what she portrays what a shallow thing to say. I am sure you've never seen her show. So all you have is appearances to go by .

It all about appearance as the last goofball to have that time slot just wasn't cutting it. Kelly's claim to fame is she isn't as over the top crazy talking as the other winger females. Or some of those coach sitters in the morning.

She would agree that you see her as nothing more than a sex object? Wow, you really are deluded.See? That's the only contribution you have here - the straw man fallacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man): "To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and to refute it, without ever having actually refuted the original position."
I'm assuming you played none of the videos/audio, right? Or else you wouldn't have posted that.

See? That's the only contribution you have here - the straw man fallacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man): "To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and to refute it, without ever having actually refuted the original position."
I'm assuming you played none of the videos/audio, right? Or else you wouldn't have posted that.

Yes, the other video's reveal a lot about the other probable requirements of the job. Being symbols of male appreciation seems to be part of the job as well. Just going through the other clips it seems that 'leg shots' are somewhat overdone.

There must be some average looking women who may be a little overweight that meet the journalistic qualifications at Fox. From what I have seen the standard of journalism required is very basic.

Yes, the other video's reveal a lot about the other probable requirements of the job. Being symbols of male appreciation seems to be part of the job as well. Just going through the other clips it seems that 'leg shots' are somewhat overdone.

There must be some average looking women who may be a little overweight that meet the journalistic qualifications at Fox. From what I have seen the standard of journalism required is very basic.

And at MSNBC the requirement is ranting until you internally combust . (Rachel Madcow being the exception... and the faux "conservative " on the morning Schmo).

And at MSNBC the requirement is ranting until you internally combust . (Rachel Madcow being the exception... and the faux "conservative " on the morning Schmo).


I probably would have added that if I knew more about the liberal media. Thanks for the balancing that out. Yes, well, the less said about standards of journalism the better.

What everyone needs to realize is that despite the claim that these are "news " networks ;the vast majority of their format is commentary and debate . When that is realized then their formats are better understood. You probably don't want me to get started on "standards of journalism". When we only had a choice of 3 major networks ,the so called gatekeepers of truth " were hardly unbiased . They disguised their biases in a straight news reporting format . But their biases were still there . The difference was that there was no counter-point .
I much prefer today where the consumer has choice in coverage.

What everyone needs to realize is that despite the claim that these are "news " networks ;the vast majority of their format is commentary and debate . When that is realized then their formats are better understood. You probably don't want me to get started on "standards of journalism". When we only had a choice of 3 major networks ,the so called gatekeepers of truth " were hardly unbiased . They disguised their biases in a straight news reporting format . But their biases were still there . The difference was that there was no counter-point .
I much prefer today where the consumer has choice in coverage.


I don't claim they are news networks. I get that idea from the fact that on just about every screen shot we see in the bottom left hand corner "Fox News"

Yes, it is an excellent choice. No doubt you are bound to get someways close to the truth with that type of 'choice'.


Tom have a look at what this type of choice is giving you.

Tom have a look at what this type of choice is giving you.
Yes I have . As you might have noticed in my responses , I don't restrict my options . For one thing ,most of the news I read comes from a variety of on line sources.. and most of them are primary sources, (if you consider the major news outlets as "primary") ,or reference them.

Yes, it is an excellent choice. No doubt you are bound to get someways close to the truth with that type of 'choice'.
You forgot the sarcasm font . I suppose 'all the news the government sees fit to report ' is a much better option.

Yes I have . As you might have noticed in my responses , I don't restrict my options . For one thing ,most of the news I read comes from a variety of on line sources.. and most of them are primary sources, (if you consider the major news outlets as "primary") ,or reference them.



Most people go to the site that that best suits their political beliefs. This is pretty evident here. For example, far right wingers have a tendency to go to far right wing sources to confirm their preconceived beliefs. In a similar fashion left wingers go to those sources that support their beliefs.

[/QUOTE=tomder55;3569942]

You forgot the sarcasm font . I suppose 'all the news the government sees fit to report ' is a much better option.

Tom, you are drawing a false dichotomy again. It doesn't have to be one or the other. So, no I don't believe that government gives us all the news we need to know.

[/QUOTE]

If you want to draw that dichotomy then in the end it is just really Hobson's choice

Yes, the other video's reveal a lot about the other probable requirements of the job. Being symbols of male appreciation seems to be part of the job as well. Just going through the other clips it seems that 'leg shots' are somewhat overdone.

There must be some average looking women who may be a little overweight that meet the journalistic qualifications at Fox. From what I have seen the standard of journalism required is very basic.

Apparently you haven't seen much either. They have plenty of average or worse looking contributors and for some of us it's also a matter presentation. I'd rather watch someone who is entertaining, engaging and humorous than someone who is pompous, snide and/or ranting until their spleen bursts.

Hello again, Steve:

They have plenty of average or worse looking contributors It's true. Alan Combs is the ugliest person on earth and Bob Beckel is a fat sweating slob.

Hmmmm... I seem to think they have OTHER similarities besides ugliness. I wonder what that might be?

excon

Hello again, Steve:
It's true. Alan Combs is the ugliest person on earth and Bob Beckel is a fat sweating slob.

Hmmmm... I seem to think they have OTHER similarities besides ugliness. I wonder what that might be?

excon

They're alcoholics?

Greta is no looker and no one would confuse Susan Estrich with Heidi Klum. I feel ill just listening to her voice.

Colmes looks like something that came out of the crypt.

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4125/4995328716_8cfbf6837d_z.jpg

Colmes looks like something that came out of the crypt.I think you may have missed ex's point. But in a way you reinforced it.

Before Colmes went off the rail progressive ,he hosted a morning drive time radio show here in NY . He was very entertaining . He is good at the roles he plays . On Fox he plays foil ,and he's good at it too. However ,his radio show on progressive radio is a snoozer. He should listen to some of his tapes from his morning show to rediscover what he lost.